Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Starcraft II - Wings of Liberty: No LAN? Good or Bad?

Last response: in Video Games
Share

Is Blizzard's decision to pull LAN support for Starcraft II a necesary evil or a poorly aimed attempt to stop piracy that hurts the honest people?

Total: 24 votes (1 blank vote)

  • Yes, They could have utilized the MPQ encryption instead.
  • 48 %
  • Yes. They could have pulled out files from the MPQs and made them only online attainable.
  • 18 %
  • No. LAN is not widely used enough to affect most honest people.
  • 14 %
  • No. Battle.net is sufficient enough for a LAN replacement.
  • 22 %
July 24, 2010 9:23:00 PM

Recently, I pre-ordered the latest and possibly greatest RTS game in history: Starcraft II. After extensive research I have found that due to the pirating that happened to Starcraft I and its expansion Brood War, the guys at blizzard have decided to pull LAN support to prevent private servers to bypass the battlenet verification via not connecting to battlenet (no key check). I'm all for loss prevention and Blizzard has had a nightmare with this largely due to LAN support, but this seems likely to hurt those who use LAN at home I.E. me. I have like six PCs, three of which I have a separate key for but my Comcast Internet is what I'm worried about handling 3 separate Battlenet logins at once or even if Battlenet will let me do this. So here I make my stand. Is this the best solution?
July 26, 2010 10:59:01 PM

I feel it is the best solution for what Blizzard's vision is for all of their games. When people think of Starcraft, they seem to think of 1998-2000, LAN party's at their finest.

What most people don't do is think of other blizzard games and what Battle.net and Blizzard's community as a whole have become.

Blizzard's battle.net is becoming a single integral network between all of their games for people to be a part of their community. If a battle.net login were not required, many would miss out on what the community as a whole has to offer to enrich the gaming experience beyond the single player, although Blizzard's single player is still top notch.

The decision to pull LAN play I feel was multi-pronged: Piracy and Counterfeiting, and Community. By disabling LAN play, people will have to go through battle.net and, at first while they may not like it, I have a feeling they'll grow to love what it has to offer (expanded friends list via other games, achievements, it's awesome, Blizzard rarely makes bad decisions, etc).
July 27, 2010 10:58:16 AM

Well, I don't know how often do people LANparties somewhere else but I attend on one like once per two months and we usually don't have an Internet connection there...that simply means I won't buy the game.
Related resources
July 27, 2010 2:46:56 PM

This is a big mistake! Company of Heroes requires a validation as you enter the game and I'm fine with that, however once you're in you can select LAN and you're good to go. There is no reason Blizzard can't do as well. More importantly, have multiple users connected to Battle.net behind a single NAT based IP address, as is typical in most homes, will invariably cause difficulties.

Removing LAN is beyond stupid! Between my children and grandchildren we were set to buy 6 copies. Now we will need to pass this game by until Blizzard comes to their senses.

Cheers,
July 27, 2010 3:54:47 PM

I understand and accept Blizzard's decision with this. I also understand the frustration for the LAN'ers out there. As for me, personally, I hardly go to LAN parties anymore. I've already downloaded and installed the game. Just gotta purchase the Key at 10am PST. Long night of SC2 ahead of me :) . I'm gonna be dead tired at work tomorrow lol.
July 27, 2010 3:56:39 PM

Frankly, SC2 is looking overpriced and lacking to me. Everything I've seen so far makes me think I'll stick with the first, and not the imitator.

I can't just imagine how the "full" game (3 campaigns) will end up costing $180, when you can get the first, which is a far better RTS, for only $20.
July 27, 2010 4:03:39 PM

As someone who's been able to play Starcraft at both blizzcon's that it was available, and beta it, I can safely say that Starcraft two is quite an improvement.

However of course that's an opinion. Just like counter-strike, not everyone moved from 1.6 to source! I understand both sides equally, both will have their champions.
July 27, 2010 6:43:19 PM

brett1042002 said:
I understand and accept Blizzard's decision with this. I also understand the frustration for the LAN'ers out there. As for me, personally, I hardly go to LAN parties anymore. I've already downloaded and installed the game. Just gotta purchase the Key at 10am PST. Long night of SC2 ahead of me :) . I'm gonna be dead tired at work tomorrow lol.


Doesn't need to be a LAN party. What happens if you have children or friends who want to play together in the same home? Getting past NAT'd IP with multiple users has always been a challenge. Have we really become so isolated a culture that we don't have friends over to play a game? Very short-sighted on Blizzard's part.

Cheers,
July 27, 2010 9:07:10 PM

panzer06 said:
Doesn't need to be a LAN party. What happens if you have children or friends who want to play together in the same home? Getting past NAT'd IP with multiple users has always been a challenge. Have we really become so isolated a culture that we don't have friends over to play a game? Very short-sighted on Blizzard's part.

Cheers,


Having friends over to game on the PC? No, unfortunately I cannot relate to that. I would say the only time friends/family come over to game is on a console of some sort. But I do see your point on the matter.


July 28, 2010 1:55:23 PM

No LAN, no sale. Buh bye Blizz.
July 29, 2010 12:05:26 AM

gamerk316 said:
Frankly, SC2 is looking overpriced and lacking to me. Everything I've seen so far makes me think I'll stick with the first, and not the imitator.

I can't just imagine how the "full" game (3 campaigns) will end up costing $180, when you can get the first, which is a far better RTS, for only $20.



* First off, you're making false presumptions about the cost of the next two installments. They will likely be priced as expansions and in nowhere is it written that the "Full Game" will cost $180. Not that you wouldn't be getting a "Full Game" due to the length of the campaign/story.

You're also making speculation about the game with out having played it. As a veteran of SC and BW, I find this game to be incredible. It has the feel and balance of the old game with updated graphics, gameplay and even more diversity between races. Also, the campaign is very long (seems like 30 missions or so) with awesome CGI, units, voice acting, character development etc...
And wow, the campaign editor - you can make games comparable to the other crap thrown on shelves by other developers for free.

If you compare this to any game on the market, it's still the best value because of the quality and hours of gameplay (if you enjoy rts's). The problem is that this game received a lot of hype, and for good reason. People should be spending their time complaining about all of the $50 games that came/come out with subpar gameplay, undeveloped characters, stories and copycat games with 6-10 hours of play value.

As per LAN - recent judgment was passed that makes it legal to crack games and develop LAN ports for them. This will problably happen very soon, though, I still can't believe the uproar for lack of LAN support. Who doesn't have the internet yet? I play in a house with 3 other Roommates and we have no trouble not using a LAN and playing on B.net.
July 29, 2010 3:26:28 AM

wigginsd88 said:
Recently, I pre-ordered the latest and possibly greatest RTS game in history: Starcraft II. After extensive research I have found that due to the pirating that happened to Starcraft I and its expansion Brood War, the guys at blizzard have decided to pull LAN support to prevent private servers to bypass the battlenet verification via not connecting to battlenet (no key check). I'm all for loss prevention and Blizzard has had a nightmare with this largely due to LAN support, but this seems likely to hurt those who use LAN at home I.E. me. I have like six PCs, three of which I have a separate key for but my Comcast Internet is what I'm worried about handling 3 separate Battlenet logins at once or even if Battlenet will let me do this. So here I make my stand. Is this the best solution?


I don't mind the decision. Of course its for the benefit of Blizzard's profits, but at the same time, they pretty much have the right to do what it takes to stop piracy/their hard work as long as it doesn't effect other's computers (example is that Secure Lock [ya I know I'm giving it the wrong name, but you know what I mean] stuff on some games). The other thing is as long as performance of battle.net play is equivalent to LAN play, then no big deal. The one thing I can think of that would be annoying is if you have DSL or low bandwidth cable and want to have a party of like 5-6 be over at your house/apartment and are limited by the bandwidth.
September 21, 2010 5:07:29 PM

Though I've had my ups and downs with decision of To Pull LAN Support from SCII, I've had plenty of time to think about it and evaluate the final product, while doing extensive research on how many "Honest people" were affected versus pirates thwarted and ultimately I believe blizzard made the right call. When you consider that Blizzard had put in the upwards of 10 years give or take into the Final Product, that makes it their "Child" in which they put so much time and effort AND MONEY-pause for dramatic emphasis-into they decide that if no current routines existed for LAN capabilities other than for battle.net (R) then it would make the final product on par with the current abilities of Pirates hacking it. Their decision was obviously weighed, heavily and they ultimately decided that LAN=LOSS. So I've been able to assess that a very cheap DSL can cut it (around 768K/S) for 1 copy to connect and function, so the way the prices are, if you can afford the machine to run it, and the internet, then you can either afford the game or live without it, either way, Blizzard would be wise to never repeal the LAN removal as it would likely cause them great loss of Monetary Gain, which in my own OPINION they rightly deserve said monetary gain as the game is nothing short of awesome.

Blizzard, I Salute your stand against Piracy! Long Live StarCraft!!!!!!!!
September 21, 2010 8:57:56 PM

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
!